Hello Garnet,

Your essay was an interesting and fun read for me. A lot of the content resonates with me, as well, and I touch on fractal spacetime and other related topics in my own contest essay 'Cherished Assumptions and the Progress of Physics.' You make excellent use of equations and diagrams to render technical aspects of your model accessible in a non-intimidating way. I'm trying to get through a large number of essays right now, but I may have some questions or comments a bit later.

Thanks for some enjoyable reading. That's a nice clock you have.

Regards,

Jonathan

    If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is [math]R_1 [/math] and [math]N_1 [/math] was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have [math]S_1=R_1 N_1 [/math] of points. After it anyone give you [math]dS [/math] of points so you have [math]S_2=S_1+ dS [/math] of points and [math]N_2=N_1+1 [/math] is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have [math]S_2=R_2 N_2 [/math] of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be: [math]S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] (S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1[/math] In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points [math]dS [/math] then the participant`s rating [math]R_1 [/math] was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process.

    Sergey Fedosin

    I wanted to mention;

    I particularly liked the opening of your essay, Garnet, in analogy of Korzybski's 'the word is not the thing, the map is not the territory...' I do hope to get back and comment further, but in the meanwhile - good luck.

    All the Best,

    Jonathan

    • [deleted]

    • Post #25

    dear Garnet,

    exellent essay. R. Guy Grantham has told me about your work. Actually we both describe particles as reference clocks, see my essay http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1519 or my publications on arxiv. You deserve a hugh rate.

    Best regards,

    Donatello

      Hi Jonathan,

      thanks for the kind comments. I look forward to reading your essay.

      • [deleted]

      • Post #27

      Hi Donatello,

      Thanks for the comments! I shall read your articles with interest.

      Best wishes,

      Garnet

      • [deleted]

      • Post #28

      Dear Garnet!

      Sorry could not read your essay before, during rating.

      1. I also love the geography, moved in my life in different places more than 70 times, but I think that we need not geography, and a new deep ontology. We must remember that as well as mathematics and physics, including basic theories of physics-QM and GR - is operational theory, not ontologically grounded. They work in some parts of the whole world. Mathematics - science also not ontologically grounded. So now the main problem of fundamental physics - the problem of FOUNDATION KNOWLEDGE. And for that we need a new ontological revolution. We need a new conceptual ontological revolution to "grab" (understand) the desired structure of space-time.

      2. Archaeology can also be an assistant in order to know how a person ("Protogeometr" - Edmund Husserl "Getting geometry") and learned the triunity of absolute forms of existence of matter.

      3. Your drawings are great, but they do not overcome linear thinking. It is therefore necessary to take only three of the state vector - an equilateral triangle, as a representative of the Logos and the triunity of absolute forms of existence of matter, and analyze its invariants.

      4. Many physicists want to "kill time". But to «kill time» is to kill the "memory." There is only one way: a new model of the universe is a model of an ETERNAL UNIVERSE. Here mathematics (especially geometry) comes to the fore as the language of nature.

      Sincerely, Vladimir